Chapter 6: School Personnel and School District Liability
OVERVIEW:
This chapter discusses how school personnel and school districts can be held responsible
for actions or inactions that occur to their students.
I.
The School as a Safe Place
a. Schools are expected to protect children from harm and when they fail to
do so they can be held liable.
b. Educators have 3 legal duties established by the courts in place of parents
(in loco parentis)
i. To instruct
ii. To supervise
iii. To provide safety of students
c. There is no liability when unavoidable injury occurs.
II.
Liability of School Personnel
a. Intentional torts
i. Require proof of intent
ii. Examples: assault, battery, libel, slander, defamation, false arrest,
malicious prosecution, and invasion of privacy
b. Unintentional tort
i. Requires no proof of intent
ii. Charges can occur if deemed school personnel acted
inappropriately or failed to act appropriately
iii. 4 elements must be present to establish negligence, and
unintentional tort
1. Standard of Care- the teacher or principal owned a legal
duty to protect the student by conforming to certain
standards
2. Breach of Duty
3. Proximity or legal cause- the student must be able to
demonstrate that a causal relationship existed between the
breach of duty and the actual injury sustained by the
student
4. Injury
c. Vicarious Liability - School districts can be held responsible because of
the actions of their employees
d. Foreseeability - The ability of the teacher or administrator to predict that
an activity may cause harm to a student.
1. School personnel are expected to foresee many problems
that occur
2. Ignoring a potential problem still makes you liable if a
student is injured.
e. Attractive nuisance
i. Dangerous condition that has special attraction to a less mature
child who does not appreciate the harm it could cause.
III.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
ii. If the owner of the attractive nuisance knows it is a potential
problem and fails to do anything to eliminate the risk they can be
held liable.
f. Busing
i. School leaders and parents must ensure to the greatest extent
possible that students at bus stops on school sponsored
transportation are protected from harm.
ii. School board is responsible for the students from when the bus
picks the student up to the time the student reaches the school
door.
Defamation
a. Defamation occurs when false statements are made about another person.
i. Teachers and administrators can both be held liable for defamation.
ii. School personnel can be held liable for statements against their
colleagues or students if they demonstrate malice or intent to harm.
b. 2 Types of Defamation
i. Libel- written defamation
ii. Slander- oral defamation
c. Defenses against defamation
i. Privilege- teachers given benefit of the doubt by courts because of
qualified privilege
ii. Good Faith- similar to privilege, as long as teachers act without
intent to harm
iii. Truth
iv. Mental Distress
v. False Imprisonment
vi. Trespassing on Personal Property
Proper Instruction and Student Safety- teachers are liable for safety and have the
responsibility of following all safety precautions.
Duties of Supervision
a. Adequate supervision in one situation may be totally inadequate in another
situation.
b. Courts consider several factors in determining liability in supervision
cases
i. Nature of activity involved
ii. Age
iii. Number of students involved in an activity
iv. Quality of supervision
c. If administrators are aware students are on campus, before or after the
school day, they can be held liable for injury and are responsible for
supervision.
Liability Involving Civil Rights Statutes
Educational Malpractice
LANDMARK CASES:
Hosemann v Oakland Unified School District: This case, along with Doe v Taylor, dealt
with making the school environment safe and conducive for students. This represented
the first time a court interpreted a state constitutional amendment that grants students and
staff an “inalienable right” to attend campuses that are safe, secure, and crime free.
Doe v Taylor: This case, along with Hosemann v Oakland Unified School District, dealt
with making the school environment safe and conducive for students. This case involved
sexual abuse of a female student where the principal was held liable.
Wood v Strickland: This court case ruled that school board members can be held liable
for damages under Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871 when they violate the
constitutional rights of students.
Carey v Piphus: This case is significant because it clarified the conditions under which
recovery of damages can be rewarded. School officials violated the student’s Fourteenth
Amendment rights because they were given a lengthy suspension without a due process.
Francis v School Board of Palm Beach County: This case dealt with school
transportation. The Florida Supreme Court ruled the school board’s duty of care to
students extends from when a bus picks up the student at the bus stop to when they reach
the school door.
Gordon v Oak Park School District No. 97: The Illinois Appellate Courts ruled that a
teacher was allowed to yell at a student. The teacher would not be held liable when they
verbally chastise a student.
Celestine v Lafayette Parish School Board: This case involved a teacher embarrassing a
student by making them write an inappropriate word they used in class on the board
1,000 times. The teacher was dismissed in this case.
New Jersey v T.L.O.: The court ruled that the parent does not always have to be notified
during a period of detainment of a student. The court said they need to allow schools
leeway to provide a safe school environment. In this particular case a student was
accused of bringing a gun to school for which no gun was ever found. The student
claimed she asked for police and school officials to call her mother and they did not
comply.
Norman v Ogallala Public School District: The Supreme Court of Nebraska ruled on
this case. In this case, a student was injured while completing a project while operating a
welding torch. The court ruled that the district did not adequately protect the student by
not complying with safety regulations.
Titus v Lindberg: This case involved on-campus, before school supervision. The court
ruled that the school is responsible for supervising students who arrive early for school,
regardless of how early, if you are aware of their presence. The courts have not set a time
frame on when supervision must occur.
Peter W. v San Francisco Unified School District: This case dealt with educational
malpractice. This case involved a student who was unable to read above the 5th grade
level at the time of high school graduation. His family sued the school district for
essentially providing a bad education. The courts could not establish standards of care
for classroom instruction and therefore the schools won the decision.
Hoffman v Board of Education: This case dealt with educational malpractice. A student
who was misplaced into a program for the mentally retarded for eleven years claimed he
had diminished intellectual ability because of the misplacement. Eventually, the courts
ruled in favor of the school board because they couldn’t determine that they breeched
their duty.
APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATORS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS:
Teachers, administrators and school districts all can be held liable for actions or inactions
that result in students being injured. Courts have been realistic by not holding these
parties responsible for unavoidable injury, but in many other cases they have been held
liable. Most schools and teachers recognize the liability associated with intentional torts
(ex. Assault) but fail to recognize that unintentional torts can leave them liable as
well. Unintentional torts can arise when school personnel fail to act appropriately. For
example, ignoring a dangerous situation, like shattered glass, could put school personnel
liable if a student is injured. There seems to be no room for a teacher or administrator to
ever expect someone else to take care of a problem. Another major issue school
personnel need to be aware of is defamation, or making false statements about another
person. If school personnel make false statements about another colleague or a student,
with intent to harm and malice they can be held liable. Finally, administrators and school
districts must be aware that the court has never specified a time that supervision of
students on campus begins and ends. Therefore, schools must have a plan in place for
supervision even outside of the time their staff is contracted to begin and end their day.
KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS:
Respondeat Superior: the master is responsible only for authorized acts of its servants
or agents.
Vicarious Liability: the board rather than the principal is held liable for the tortious acts
of its teachers, even though the board is not at fault.
Nuisance: any dangerous or hazardous condition that limits free use of property by the
user.
Invitee: one who is present on the premises by invitation of the owner.
Licensee: a person who has the privilege to enter school property.
Trespass: enters school property without permission.
Defamation: occurs when false statements are made about another person.
Slander: oral defamation.
Standard of Care: The teacher or principal owned a legal duty to protect the student by
conforming to certain standards.
Breach of Duty: The teacher or principal owed a legal duty to protect the student by
conforming to certain standards and failed to do so.
Proximity or Legal Cause: The student must be able to demonstrate that a causal
relationship existed between the breach of duty and the actual injury sustained by the
student.
Injury: The student must prove actual injury based on a breach of duty by the teacher or
principal.
Contributory Negligence: the most common defense employed in charges of
negligence. Failure of an injured plaintiff to act prudently, considered to be a
contributory factor in the injury suffered, and sometimes reducing the amount recovered
from the defendant
Precedent: an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be
considered in subsequent similar circumstances.
Sovereign Immunity: “The King can do no wrong” The state or federal government is
protected from suit and can’t be held liable for injuries that resulted in the proper
execution of government functions.
Governmental Functions: Doctrine extended to school districts because they are
involved in state action and are agents of the state.
Proprietary: These activities are normally those in which admission fees are charged.
Ministerial: Governmental acts are those required by state mandates or local school
board policy and ones for which school personnel do not exercise choice.
Statute of Limitations: a statute prescribing a period of limitation for the bringing of
certain kinds of legal action.